Conservative Women

[Woodruff]

Since when does anyone read articles in Playboy?

In truth, we were assigned some xeroxed articles in high school. JUST the articles, mind you.. (on the JFK assassination, the interview with the president of the day, whom I decline to name).

Other than that... it's just not to my tastes (lol -- if you don't get why, check my profile -- lol)

You Pennsylvanians are all alike! <chuckle>

[thegreekdog]

Hmm... I think you missed the point BBS (perhaps purposefully).

To reiterate the point:

Liberal columnist - "Conservative woman is a cunt and I would like to hate f*ck her."

No reaction.

Conservative columnist - "Liberal woman is a cunt and I would like to hate f*ck her."

Conservative columnist is fired from his job and later prosecuted for hate crimes.

Playboy magazine writer Guy Cimbalo wrote a mean article. So what? Although it's raunchy, it's a sex mag whose writer has an agenda against conservative women who are ugly and who he'd like to "hate f*ck." That still isn't criminal; he hasn't committed anything illegal. And I'll go into what he actually wrote and what it means to hate f*ck very soon.

What helps him is that he isn't writing for some outlet for the official views of liberal or conservative politics, it's just a porno mag, so in terms of firing "liberal" or "conservative" columnists a porno magazine company is going to deal with their writers differently. Had he been a liberal columnist for something like MSNBC, or any liberal organization or company with a liberal agenda in the political scene hitting TVs everywhere, then it would've been a different outcome.

No reaction? Yeah, there was, but let's go on to a more specific question:

How about a legal reaction?

If there's enough evidence of a hate-crime, there should have been a lawsuit against him (but I couldn't find one). Why? Because, as you say, he's a liberal columnist? No, because it wasn't even a hate crime to begin with. It's isn't criminal to write such opinions in a magazine. I don't have the files on any lawsuit brought against him, but I can imagine the judge throwing it down with the ruling of "ridiculous." But, hey, maybe freedom of speech shouldn't be upheld so much, huh? (....).

As far as a conservative writer for a conservative magazine similar to Playboy writing something like this and getting fired and getting sentenced with a hate crime, please give me an example. If he was working for the mass media in politics, it's a different story, but please post that too if you run into anything.

Regardless of one's political or apolitical liberal/conservative lifestyle, if one commits a hate crime, then they'll be charged for it (as should happen, but there are of course exceptions as we all know). For one to suggest he got away scot-free from the legal system merely because he's liberal, is absurd. To label what he wrote as a hate crime is also absurd.

What we're missing are the details on that lawsuit(s) with the charge of a hate-crime that was brought up against him and was turned down. But since we don't, let's go into those details that would have more to do with what he actually wrote and his actions or lack there of--not those details of his political stance, which are obvious but aren't illegal.


With the help of the FBI, we'll define hate crime:

A hate crime, also known as a bias crime, is a criminal offense committed against a person, property, or society that is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses ... index.html

For a change, let's actually looked at what the playboy man wrote:

http://blogwonks.com/2009/06/05/playboys-conservative-women-hate-f*ck-fantasy/

Obama promised us the dream of post-partisanship—a cuckoo land where party affiliation and factional animosity were forgotten. Turn on cable news or open any newspaper, however, and you’ll quickly discover that the dream has yet to materialize. But there is a way to reach across the aisle without letting principles fall by the wayside. We speak, naturally, of the hate f*ck. We may despise everything these women represent, but goddammit they’re hot. Let the healing begin.

Writing this isn't illegal. Sorry, tgd, but it isn't. He hates what they represent (conservatives), which again isn't illegal. Is he inciting others to go and rape these women? No. He's done nothing illegal.

Go look at what he writes for each woman:

Michelle Malkin
He talks about her writing a book defending WWII's Japanese internment camps. (OH, no wonder the conservatives didn't take that well. And notice how Ms. Raezler didn't at all counter that claim)

The others, he just makes fun of. Something along the lines that conservatives have done to liberals within the mass media world. But he adds that he'd like to f*ck these women, but wouldn't because he can't stand them, which again is not illegal.

Yeesh.

I was pretty sure I was understandable, but it appears that I was not.

I don't have a problem with anyone saying anything about anyone else... ever (with some extremely limited exceptions).

My issue has nothing to do with legal recourse, employer recourse, prosecuting these guys for this or anything else.

My reaction to this is the same as Nobunaga's reaction. Am I shocked these things were said by not only this Playboy dude or Rolling Stone magazine? No, of course not. I'm not even shocked these things were said by Keith Olbermann and some a-hole on ABC (the latter two are presumably not porn mag writers or liberal rock magazine writers... in fact I think they are actually political commentators). What I'm shocked by is the lack of consistency in how society, specifically the left-leaning members of our society, determine who is worthy of scorn for how they discuss their views. Why is it popular and okay for people to criticize Rush Limbaugh for saying things like "Womanazi" while there is no great outcry when Keith Olbermann calls a woman a meatbag or when ABC refers to a vice presidential candidate as a Barbie doll or when the press secretary writes a grocery list on his hand?

It's call hypocrisy. Frankly, I don't think anyone should be ripped or fired or prosecuted or mocked for saying anything like that; but when we get one reaction for one situation and a different reaction for a similar situation, there is a problem.

Does that fucking make sense now?

[john9blue]

I thought we had already established that conservative women were hotter? My RL experiences have backed this up.

what the f*ck.. there is another nobunaga?

He has been here forever.

[Army of GOD]

Does that fucking make sense now?

Don't mess with the Greek.

[BigBallinStalin]

Yeesh.

I was pretty sure I was understandable, but it appears that I was not.

I don't have a problem with anyone saying anything about anyone else... ever (with some extremely limited exceptions).

My issue has nothing to do with legal recourse, employer recourse, prosecuting these guys for this or anything else.

My reaction to this is the same as Nobunaga's reaction. Am I shocked these things were said by not only this Playboy dude or Rolling Stone magazine? No, of course not. I'm not even shocked these things were said by Keith Olbermann and some a-hole on ABC (the latter two are presumably not porn mag writers or liberal rock magazine writers... in fact I think they are actually political commentators). What I'm shocked by is the lack of consistency in how society, specifically the left-leaning members of our society, determine who is worthy of scorn for how they discuss their views. Why is it popular and okay for people to criticize Rush Limbaugh for saying things like "Womanazi" while there is no great outcry when Keith Olbermann calls a woman a meatbag or when ABC refers to a vice presidential candidate as a Barbie doll or when the press secretary writes a grocery list on his hand?

It's call hypocrisy. Frankly, I don't think anyone should be ripped or fired or prosecuted or mocked for saying anything like that; but when we get one reaction for one situation and a different reaction for a similar situation, there is a problem.

Does that fucking make sense now?

Ok, society's reaction. The picture's getting cleared.

What I'm shocked by is the lack of consistency in how society, specifically the left-leaning members of our society, determine who is worthy of scorn for how they discuss their views.

I've always felt that society was split down the middle in terms of their reaction to such things. In my opinion, I've always seen both conservatives and liberals generally act this way, so at times a large group of each side can be hypocrits--not just liberals. Then again, our views are mainly influenced by our local environment, so perhaps this imbalance is merely perceived but lacking concrete evidence. You could be tuning into mainly just one side while ignoring some facts and taking the facts that already support your view. But who knows, I don't know where you live, and I don't know how you operate on a daily basis, but it seems to me that you're just seeing what you want to see.

Honestly, I don't subscribe myself to either side, and I don't often come into contact with American news from TV, internet, or word-of-mouth--I only can relate to my environment from where I grew up in the US and my history there (I left not so long ago), so one can see the problems in facts based on only one's perceptions (or on the perceptions of those who already agree with you).
_____________________
PS: When you say "some conservative got fired for doing someting similar to what these liberals did but had worse consequences for him" (more or less), then exactly what person/event are you talking about?

[Ray Rider]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXKuDYvM6Wk

bullying women

you know the reporter scoped her shirt out in advance, and then pretended to bump into her as she chose who to interview. Can't get much more of a pre-meditated ambush and have the 14 year old still come out on top.

lol I'd say that reporter got more than she bargained for in those two discussions. She tried to make the two supporters look stupid, but instead her guided questions ended up demonstrating her bias.

[thegreekdog]

Yeesh.

I was pretty sure I was understandable, but it appears that I was not.

I don't have a problem with anyone saying anything about anyone else... ever (with some extremely limited exceptions).

My issue has nothing to do with legal recourse, employer recourse, prosecuting these guys for this or anything else.

My reaction to this is the same as Nobunaga's reaction. Am I shocked these things were said by not only this Playboy dude or Rolling Stone magazine? No, of course not. I'm not even shocked these things were said by Keith Olbermann and some a-hole on ABC (the latter two are presumably not porn mag writers or liberal rock magazine writers... in fact I think they are actually political commentators). What I'm shocked by is the lack of consistency in how society, specifically the left-leaning members of our society, determine who is worthy of scorn for how they discuss their views. Why is it popular and okay for people to criticize Rush Limbaugh for saying things like "Womanazi" while there is no great outcry when Keith Olbermann calls a woman a meatbag or when ABC refers to a vice presidential candidate as a Barbie doll or when the press secretary writes a grocery list on his hand?

It's call hypocrisy. Frankly, I don't think anyone should be ripped or fired or prosecuted or mocked for saying anything like that; but when we get one reaction for one situation and a different reaction for a similar situation, there is a problem.

Does that fucking make sense now?

Ok, society's reaction. The picture's getting cleared.

What I'm shocked by is the lack of consistency in how society, specifically the left-leaning members of our society, determine who is worthy of scorn for how they discuss their views.

I've always felt that society was split down the middle in terms of their reaction to such things. In my opinion, I've always seen both conservatives and liberals generally act this way, so at times a large group of each side can be hypocrits--not just liberals. Then again, our views are mainly influenced by our local environment, so perhaps this imbalance is merely perceived but lacking concrete evidence. You could be tuning into mainly just one side while ignoring some facts and taking the facts that already support your view. But who knows, I don't know where you live, and I don't know how you operate on a daily basis, but it seems to me that you're just seeing what you want to see.

Honestly, I don't subscribe myself to either side, and I don't often come into contact with American news from TV, internet, or word-of-mouth--I only can relate to my environment from where I grew up in the US and my history there (I left not so long ago), so one can see the problems in facts based on only one's perceptions (or on the perceptions of those who already agree with you).
_____________________
PS: When you say "some conservative got fired for doing someting similar to what these liberals did but had worse consequences for him" (more or less), then exactly what person/event are you talking about?

I was talking about hyperbole and internet license.

[Timminz]

Yeesh.

I was pretty sure I was understandable, but it appears that I was not.

I don't have a problem with anyone saying anything about anyone else... ever (with some extremely limited exceptions).

My issue has nothing to do with legal recourse, employer recourse, prosecuting these guys for this or anything else.

My reaction to this is the same as Nobunaga's reaction. Am I shocked these things were said by not only this Playboy dude or Rolling Stone magazine? No, of course not. I'm not even shocked these things were said by Keith Olbermann and some a-hole on ABC (the latter two are presumably not porn mag writers or liberal rock magazine writers... in fact I think they are actually political commentators). What I'm shocked by is the lack of consistency in how society, specifically the left-leaning members of our society, determine who is worthy of scorn for how they discuss their views. Why is it popular and okay for people to criticize Rush Limbaugh for saying things like "Womanazi" while there is no great outcry when Keith Olbermann calls a woman a meatbag or when ABC refers to a vice presidential candidate as a Barbie doll or when the press secretary writes a grocery list on his hand?

It's call hypocrisy. Frankly, I don't think anyone should be ripped or fired or prosecuted or mocked for saying anything like that; but when we get one reaction for one situation and a different reaction for a similar situation, there is a problem.

Does that fucking make sense now?

Ok, society's reaction. The picture's getting cleared.

What I'm shocked by is the lack of consistency in how society, specifically the left-leaning members of our society, determine who is worthy of scorn for how they discuss their views.

I've always felt that society was split down the middle in terms of their reaction to such things. In my opinion, I've always seen both conservatives and liberals generally act this way, so at times a large group of each side can be hypocrits--not just liberals. Then again, our views are mainly influenced by our local environment, so perhaps this imbalance is merely perceived but lacking concrete evidence. You could be tuning into mainly just one side while ignoring some facts and taking the facts that already support your view. But who knows, I don't know where you live, and I don't know how you operate on a daily basis, but it seems to me that you're just seeing what you want to see.

Honestly, I don't subscribe myself to either side, and I don't often come into contact with American news from TV, internet, or word-of-mouth--I only can relate to my environment from where I grew up in the US and my history there (I left not so long ago), so one can see the problems in facts based on only one's perceptions (or on the perceptions of those who already agree with you).
_____________________
PS: When you say "some conservative got fired for doing someting similar to what these liberals did but had worse consequences for him" (more or less), then exactly what person/event are you talking about?

I was talking about hyperbole and internet license.

Otherwise known as, "Strawman: The Internet's Favourite Fallacious Form Of Argument"

[PLAYER57832]

Yeesh.

I was pretty sure I was understandable, but it appears that I was not.

I don't have a problem with anyone saying anything about anyone else... ever (with some extremely limited exceptions).

My issue has nothing to do with legal recourse, employer recourse, prosecuting these guys for this or anything else.

My reaction to this is the same as Nobunaga's reaction. Am I shocked these things were said by not only this Playboy dude or Rolling Stone magazine? No, of course not. I'm not even shocked these things were said by Keith Olbermann and some a-hole on ABC (the latter two are presumably not porn mag writers or liberal rock magazine writers... in fact I think they are actually political commentators). What I'm shocked by is the lack of consistency in how society, specifically the left-leaning members of our society, determine who is worthy of scorn for how they discuss their views. Why is it popular and okay for people to criticize Rush Limbaugh for saying things like "Womanazi" while there is no great outcry when Keith Olbermann calls a woman a meatbag or when ABC refers to a vice presidential candidate as a Barbie doll or when the press secretary writes a grocery list on his hand?

While I agree with your tone, I cannot say I agree with the details. ABC was not simply "let slide" for calling Pallin a "Barbie doll", but at the same time, that is a bit different than the context of Rush Limbaugh's rhetoric.

Further, as I have said earlier, there is a big difference between a stereotypical "man-hating" Berkliite (talking stereotypes, acknowledging this is not representative of all in Berkeley or anything close) spouting off vile or, to be honest a man posting in the hardly pro-women PlayBoy magazine. (note not many women even pay attention to that rag, unless its under their son's bed -- lol) and someone putting forth comments in a major, supposedly objective (to a point) news outlet.

When it comes to ABC, it was one scathing comment (NOT appropriate, yes) about someone who, well... was rather untypical. When it comes to Limbaugh, his comments tend to be directed more uniformly at a wider, general group and tend to be less a direct personnal attack as the insinuation that anyone who thinks differently from him .. for whatever reason, is an idiot and worthy of ridicule, regardless of how reasoned their stance.

As a woman, I tend to notice ALL attacks on women, regardless of source. You likely notice more those that disagree with your own views. (its human nature). Even though I rarely pay attention to the conservative media, except here, I do notice far more vindictive and virulant attacks from the right. Also, as I noted earlier, liberal attacks tend to be more personnal, against particular individuals. Conservative attacks tend to be more broad-based and general attacks on ANYONE who simply disagrees. That makes for a difference, the way I see it.

Now, I am not going to assert this is always true. The media was pretty cruel to Pallin. But, even so, she was one person, and I believe pretty abhorrant. Also, compared to the right-wing attacks on Obama, was not actually all that bad. Comparing liberal attack of this person who was supposed to be next in line for the president, had she been elected to the treatment by conservatives of far less powerful women, NOT up for election, etc... is a rather disengenious.

It's call hypocrisy. Frankly, I don't think anyone should be ripped or fired or prosecuted or mocked for saying anything like that; but when we get one reaction for one situation and a different reaction for a similar situation, there is a problem.

Does that fucking make sense now?

In this particular case, perhaps. In general, not at all.